About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
MSNBCW 15
CNNW 9
FBC 4
CNBC 3
CSPAN 2
CSPAN2 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KGO (ABC) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 54
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 54 (some duplicates have been removed)
, don't worry as much about the deficit, the revenues will come in, and we have to get rid of the social safety net the way it's been, and cut spending, slash spending dramatically. it was very divided policywise and barack obama won pretty handily. >> a week after the election john boehner, speaker boehner, does a press statement and he says we're not going to raise revenues. we should look at loopholes and deductions. >> one thing that hasn't changed and you can put on as many senate republicans as you want looking reasonable. what hasn't changed is the tea party caucus in the house. they've lost a few members, but they're still a majority and john boehner has to find some way to get something past them. that's why i doubt there will be a christmastime deal. i think the president is going to have to let these tax cuts end and then boehner may have a chance of convincing them to pass tax cuts for the bottom 98% without the top 2%. >> do you agree with that, dr. peterson? that the president will be forced to allow these to run their course simply so that republicans in the house won't ha
? >> well, first of all, i do believe the middle class has a stake and a good, solid balanced, deficit reduction plan. the plan should be what the president campaigned on, namely balance. that means we've got to have a substantial contribution from revenues. the revenues have to come from the folks who have been making good money during the recession. that's folks over $250,000 or some number close to. that the pentagon's got to make a contribution and if there is anything on healthcare, it's gotta be about reforming it, bringing the costs down, not cutting benefits. >> eliot: let's drill down a couple of pieces of this. what do you think the underlying ratio should be between cost cutting and revenue generation. last summer it was 10 to 1 in terms of cutting costs to revenue. thankfully the deal didn't get done. should it be one-to-one? where would you like to see this happen? >> you know, i actually don't know that number because i think the question is i think we need about a trillion and a half from revenues and the
, that is .5 percent of the deficit. we cannot get there, get the deficit down without significant cuts in spending. >>neil: the election has consequences and you could argue that a key premise of the president's re-election was i will raise taxes on the rich and he is likely entitled to that, he will likely see that but it is all the other things they are leveraging with democrats do not touch entitlements and putting everything on table it remind me of george bush sr. he agreed to reverse the pledge oh ride -- "read my lips, no new taxes." but the democrats never offered correspondenting spend cuts. we know what happened to him. what happens to those who agree do in the republican party? >>guest: the republican party has to stand for economic growth and it has to stand for the principle that keeping tax rates low and reforming the tax system is the way to grow the economy. i disagree slightly with rand paul. i am in favor of closing loopholes. i hate them. i call them termites in the tax system but we should use that money to credit a first-class world class tax system that stops expo
clout with congress. the goal: a sweeping deficit agreement to avert $650 billion in spending cuts and tax increases at the start of 2013. from the white house came word that president obama will try to build public pressure on congress to raise taxes on the wealthy and prevent tax hikes for everyone else. white house spokesman jay carney. >> well, the president believes very strongly that the american people matter in this debate. because this debate is about them. the question of whether or not taxes go up on 98% of american tax payers is a very important to ordinary americans. it is not just a matter for discussion between the president and the senate minority leader. or other congressional leaders. >> brown: to that end the president met privately today with small business owners. on friday he'll travel to the philadelphia area to speak further on the issue. not to be outdone, house republicans said they'll meet with small business owners and workers in their districts arguing against the president's plan. in the senate republican my ontario leader mitch mcconnell dismissed the
when people first signed that pledge, the federal budget deficit was $220 billion. this year, $1.1 trillion, how can you say nothing has changed? >> lots have changed. bush focused not on spending. the pledge only does certain things. the pledge makes tax increases more difficult at the state level, at the national level. you haven't had a republican vote for income tax since 1990 when bush threw away his presidency. 1993 tax increase, only on democratic votes. then no tax increases until 2009 when obama came in and raised taxes with obamacare. >> isn't this -- you are having republican is take a difficult pledge to cut taxes, isn't that like a quarterback saying they like taxes? >> it's a pledge not to increase taxes. people say why don't you toughen it. you don't want to change it because it is a simple guardrail. it doesn't solve the world's problems, it says no net tax increase. >> in your mind when someone signs it, how long are they committed to it? >> in writing when the person signs it as long as you are a congressman or senator. >> you are signing this for life? >> unles
that reduces the deficit by $4 trillion. that is substance. so he has not waited for people to start smelling the jet fumes at national airport. he has actively put forward a plan. >> the white house and republicans are ramping up their pr, something significant is happening behind the scenes. both sides appear to be preparing their own basis to eat their vegetables, if you will. in other words, get ready to make some sacrifices on sacred cows that are required for a grand bargain. for republicans that means swallowing changes to the bush-era tax rates and yesterday the first major house republican broke with the party line in a private meeting with the house republican whip team which is responsible for counting the conference's votes. oklahoma congressman tom cole said it's time to immediately extend the bush-era tax cuts which, of course, is what obama is calling for, for households earning less than $250,000 a year. then he later told "the new york times," quote, the first thing i'd do is make sure we don't raise taxes on 98% of the american people. we'll get some credit for that, and it'
over the next ten years. that's about 40% of the $4 trillion deficit goal that we have. that's the same thing that simpson-bowles had, 40% revenue. so the only way you can reach that, incidentally, is to allow the rates to go up. just this idea of we're going to take a look at the tax code, change some credits and deductions, you can't come up with enough money. >> so any deal will have to include at least some hike in the tax rate. >> i don't think there's any other way to approach it. that's why the president has taken this position. if we're going to make sure, for example, that we spare families making $250,000 a year or less from any income tax increase, then this idea that we're going to go into the tax code and find $1.6 trillion over ten years becomes almost impossible. we need to protect those middle income families. >> you said today that congress should deal with the fiscal cliff crisis now, but tackle entitlements, the entitlement questions, later. yesterday, senator lamar alexander said the only thing the president has to do to get an agreement from republicans now is in hi
no problem. medicaid no problem. i don't know, one trillion deficit no problem. >> markets are falli ining dean. take a look. i don't understand this. attitude. i'm not hearing it from the president. no, first of all, interest rates are low because we have had a weak economy. as far as the debt goes, listen to dean, i'm sure that he believes that the only real problem phafacing the country a the capitol gains. i think we do have a debt problem i think we have a big debt problem. the numbers in the 20s, 30s, look horrifying and we have a huge job and growth problem. i don't understand how taking dividends from 15-43 creates jobs that closes that. >> i don't see spending cuts. it won't matter. the economy collapsed and the housing bubble collapsed. make them pay zero taxes. the search goes inside out. none of it finds that it will create any of those jobs. the government has no choice. >> that is quite an experiment. that you are willing to run with 1 or 2%. from 15 to 25. we are going to taking it from 15 to 30. >> we have been there. >> you are taking the rate on capital which we have the
drug plan that a lot of these republicans voted for, not funded. you have a deficit thattic vides a trillion -- that exceeds a trillion dollars. i don't think any republicans will say what the hell let's just raise taxes because barack obama says so. neil: they are running with tails between leg. >> look at the electeds. >> look, bottom line, i don't like pledges of any kind, you have to be pragmatic in washington both sides, democrats should not make pledges either, they need to come to the table. neil: you don't have to worry, they will not. what is going on on the whole tax thing, and whole norquist thing? main were saying that -- today saying, that this is really about the imploying of grover norquist, he took afence to that in my interview earlier, but that is what is going on, probably more more than that, what do you say? >> first, i ca i have to addrest julie said, almost someone who lives inside of beltway could say that a pledge does not matter, this is a promise, they said while they serve in congress, not a short-term team, they made a promise, where i come from thee,
it and they are very, very, very loathed to break it. and that's made it impossible to reach a deficit reduction deal, until now. "the new york times" has an article in which republican after republican after republican goes on the record by name dismissing his pledge and his power. peter king says a pledge is good at the time you sign it. in 1941 i would have voted to declare war on japan. but each congress is a new congress and you can't have a rule that you're never going to raise or lower taxes. i don't want to rule anything out. senator of georgia said, i'm frankly not concerned about the norquist pledge. senator john mccain said fewer and fewer people are signing this "pledge." it's actually a pledge, but any way. senator coburn called it "a tortured vision of tax purity." and it did you want end there in that article. bill crystal said this. >> let's have a serious debate. don't scream and yell when one person says, it won't kill the country if we raise taxes on millionaires. i don't understand why republicans don't take obama's offer. >> a calmist at the national review wrote, as a matter of
to the voters that mitt romney did not. obviously, mitt romney had a huge deficit with african-american voters, hispanic voters and women voters, so i think these potential candidates are trying to map it out. >> david corn, when george w. bush ran, he got such a quick surge in the polls that no one was able to stop him. is jeb bush that guy this time? is he the one that if he makes it clear he's running, others will decide not to? >> you know, i still wonder if two words come to mind. too soon. i mean, the george w. bush presidency is still not held in high esteem amongst many voters who still blame bush for the economic downturn at the end of his administration that has carried us to this day. jeb bush has the ability to talk to hispanic, more moderate, but i also wonder if you know, people will be a little tired of the bush dynasty come to 2016. >> well, they're too tired of it now, but 2016 is a few years away. thank you both for joining me tonight. >>> coming up, good news for democrats trying to keep control of the senate in 2014 and one republican whose strategy for dealing with latino
. >> how do we move our country forward and reduce the deficit? by creating jobs and growing our economy, not by cutting programs that families rely on most. for working families it's all about putting americans back to work. not cutting the things we rely on most. >> there are signals they can't accept the kind of entitlement reforms in medicare and social security that senator graham is saying are prerequisite to a deal. >> let me tell you, first, george, and you know this, social security does not add one penny to our debt. not a penny. it's a separate funded operation. and we can do things and i believe we should now, smaller things, played out over the long term that gives its solvency. medicare is another story. only 12 years of solvency lie ahead if we do nothing. those who say don't touch it, don't change it are ignoring the obvious. we want medicare to be there for today's seniors and tomorrow, as well. we don't want to go to the poll and voucherizing it and we can make meaningful reforms without compromising the integrity of the program, making sure that the beneficiaries are n
and be on the group with a group of bipartisan business leaders and deficit hawks getting something done, meeting with republicans and democrats. do you have any more optimism let me point out you and your pal erskine bowles, he was quoted as saying he's more pessimistic something will be accomplished. >> my poor dear partner, bloodied but unvowed, six months ago erskine was saying i think we can get there. now, he's pessimistic. would be a word. we were just with a group go big or go home, democrats and republicans alike, they've got signatures of over 200 -- 102 house members, half of the senate working for us, equally divided on both sides, you have to have something bipartisan. you can write it on a single sheet of paper if it had firewalls and triggers, and if it were just signed by an equal number of democrats and republicans, the markets would lay off of us. if they continue to see this dead-head struggling, the same old stuff, they're going to punish us. when they do the guy that will get hurt is the little guy, middle class, inflation, interest rates, that's who gets hammered. what an ir
which means lowering tax rates not necessarily deficit reduction. it is the same policy romney had. it is where they were before the election. they gotta wake up and see the election, change things and they actually have to meet democrats somewhere in the middle. >> bill: i would hope. i would hope. new york times this morning, front page of the business section in terms of closing loopholes, romney was never specific about which one. new york times is saying that they know -- now we know one of the ones they're targeting. the headline is a tax break once sacred is now seen as vulnerable. what they're talking about is the mortgage interest deduction. there was no doubt it is on the table. it is one they're targeting rather than raise tax rates on the wealthy, they're going to either limit or get rid of the mortgage interest deduction. which is the most popular one. >> the most popular one. politically difficult i think. that's really the problem with romney's entire approach that said we'll just create revenue
deficit right now. it is the bridge to renewable energy, renewable energy will take a long time. if we can move to gas we get tremendous benefits in terms of cleaner energy on the way to renewable energy future. if we could get those things done, steve, this would be transformational for our economy but we have not been able to act on these things even though i said earlier there is wide bipartisan -- >> thank you. let me just try to poke holes in this. if we rollback time to just before the financial crisis you look at the u.s. deposition. douglas holtz-eakin was out there talking about that already. and john mccain and others have been but it is much worse today but if you look at the deck in a different way, look at private sector debt, the fact, forget government debt. before the financial crisis private-sector debt was 160% of gdp in the united states and despite averaging, back to 160% of gdp we are still in crisis mode, you had structural corruption between regulators and financial institutions and any place in the economy and a private sector event that led to a government response
krugman sounded a different note today in the "times" and is talking about this idea that cutting deficits is a number one priority. he writes supposedly any day now investors will lose faith in america's ability to come to grips with its budgets failures. when they do there will be a run on treasury bonds, interest will spike and the u.s. economy will plunge back into recession. this sounds plausible to many people because it's roughly speaking what happened to greece but we're not greece. he's saying while this is a real dynamic for some countries, it is not because of the way we fund ourselves, is that right, ben? >> that's right. i would say morning munnize not actually by given name. >> i didn't know that. >> he's right, we're not greece, we're a much larger economy. we can grow our way out of debts and deficits. we've got a ginormous economy. we had a huge black friday weekend. probably $600 billion for the total shopping over the holidays. the question is, as we get close and getting into december, if it looks like talks are breaking down and we have the same old lines on no tax inc
. so the biggest problem created the deficit that we have, the fiscal cliff that we're falling over is on spending. so this preoccupation with talking about taxes is talking about the smaller of the two problems that are causing the deficit. >> right. when you have a negotiation that's going on although the moment, 72% of americans according to the cnn poll believe obama and the gop should compromise to get thing off a cliff. we have to give and we see the difference ideologically, but in all kinds of tixie deductions and so on and a flat income tax increase on wealthy americans. what's the ideological difference. wealthier people pay a little more tax. >> it's not a ideological difference. what can raise the money most efficiently and effectively to create economic growth that's going to create jobs for people. one of the things i talked about during the campaign was cutting the corporate tax for manufacturing. you want to create jobs that are here in america that are going to create good-paying jobs that create things that people will consume here in it country. let's do something
is deficit is the biggest problem. here we are with the cliff, the curve, whatever you want to call it and what do we find out? even republicans are warning they don't want to go over the cliff because guess what? just cutting the deficit without any regard to the rest of our priorities is a bad idea. it happens to be the heart of republican economic policy and the other thing about never raising taxes, guess what? we don't have the gdp to seniors ratio than we did 20 years ago, so if we're going to be serious about an ageing population, it means you can't stick to these fantasies. >> i remember two years ago on the show, introducing him to the audience and explaining he's the most powerful republican in government and i had to do this long thing on who he is. and now, here he is in the center of this debate. let's listen to what the republicans are up against in the negotiations with the white house. jay carney indicated today what the president's stance is on income tax rates. >> i would say also that the president has made clear that he will not sign a bill that extends the bush
the bush tax cuts for over $250,000 expire, $80 billion. deficit of $1 trillion a year. you are only 18% of the way. you are still missing 82% of the pie here. that is the number. >> dana: two minutes left, can i ask you one other thing. transparency. some on right try to push for negotiations to be in the public and broadcast on cspan. that is a terrible idea. >> brian: it is terrible idea. the only time they dealt with the sleeves up and working deals out, grant you, eric, you are right. the grand compromise. you talk about stimulus and obamacare and the auto bail-out they did it on their own. president was not engaged. he passed it along. i don't care what harry reid says. medicare and medicaid and social security have to be restructured, not fine tuned. obamacare has to be in play. >> eric: you don't want to see it on c-span? i do. >> andrea: you worked on the hill, i did. we worked in washington. the chances of it really happening on c-span would happen in the men's room and the hallways. call each other after the camera left the room. someone brought this idea to me and it's reall
're willing to close tax loopholes to reduce the deficit, now we haven't yet seen that from congressional republican leaders, but we obviously are seeing it from prominent republicans you showed including senator graham and senator bob corker. >> question about two of those gentlemen here in a moment. cnn this morning talked to grover norquist, incumbents dare to break this pledge, dare to vote to raise taxes. the question was will he do it again? here's norquist. >> we would certainly highlight who has kept their commitment and who hasn't, but the point is historically the people who lose do so because the people in their state have figured that out. >> back to, i think, where you were going a moment ago, bob, it is interesting that when you look at the top two, two of the top republican senators we're talking about who are flirting to break this pledge, break with grover norquist and consider raising taxes on the wealthy they both face re-election in 2014. i'm talking about saxby chambliss and south carolina's lindsey graham. does that say to you that the political winds could be shifti
years. that's significant deficit reduction and you don't have to get into all this michigas as my grandma would say about which loopholes you're going to close. when you go that route you run into the same math problem mitt romney had. there's typically not enough revenue to make up for if the upper -- >> i have seen you do the experiment with the glass and it's wonderful. most americans think washington officials will behave like spoiled children, and warren buffett took the gop to school today, quote, let's forget about the rich and ultra rich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if, gasp, capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased. the ultra rich, including me, says mr. buffett, will forever pursue investment opportunities. so he's calling for a minimum tax on millionaires and billionaires. will republicans listen? >> well, it's a sensible way. if we're going to have a deal, we will have to see some kind of compromise. a minimum tax on people making over $1 million a year can generate a half it trillion in a ten-year scale. if y
of the deficit. that's an economic fact. >> we've been open to revenue by closinging loopholes as long as it's tied to spending cuts. >> as long as it's mitt romney's plan. that's what we're for. >> stephanie: what? you're acting like, it's almost like a hostage crisis. like they don't have the gun and are issuing demands. like what? >> what are you talking about? >> stephanie: exactly. mike in philadelphia, you're on the "stephanie miller show." hi, mike. >> caller: hi, steph how are you doing? >> stephanie: good, go ahead. >> caller: eric con tore brought obamacare back on the table. they won't leave that alone. >> stephanie: no, they are just the sorest losers in the world. it's like he won he won at the supreme court he won at the ballot box again moving on, we are not repealing obamacare. like really? the white house warned monday that american consumers will spend $200 billion less if the looming fiscal cliff is not averted and tax hikes are not spread across the board. the economy would take a hit of $500 billion, probably sending the country back boo recession. i get what the white h
in new hampshire say i don't mind sharing some of the cost of dealing with our debt and deficits, but i want to feel like if i'm going to do that that it's going to be fair that everybody is going to be part of sharing in that burden. >> is there something for you, senator, that's an absolute nonstarter? >> well, i think we do need to take social security off the table. because social security has not contributed to the debt and the deficits. and so we do need to fix it for the long-term, but that's a different discussion than the one that we're having about those programs that are actually costing. so i think we do have to look at the cost of health care long-term because that's going to contribute to the debt. >> i also want to ask you about susan rice, she is meeting with senators mccain, graham, and ayott. do you think she has explaining to do with what she said about benghazi? and would you support her if she is nominated for secretary of state? >> she's not yet been nominated. so i'm going to look carefully at her credentials, which i think qualify her very well to be nominated. i
, the two false wars created the deficit. we need to lock arms and walk up to the cliff and see what it is all about. >> bill: arnold you got it. alan in new bedford mass. >> caller: good morning, bill. i think there are two separate issues. the bush tax cuts were to expire in 2010. they were only extended was because of [ inaudible ]. period. >> bill: yeah, that was all over the debt ceiling negotiations. the president went along with it, but it's time to end them now. they are still making the argument that that is a job creator. no, it's not. no, it's not. >> announcer: this is the "bill press show." ♪ >> announcer: chatting with you live at current.com/bill press. this is the "bill press show," live on your radio and current tv. >> bill: how about it coming to you live indeed. coming you live on cirrus xm this hour only and on current tv. republicans talking out both sides of their mouth. on one side they are saying hey yeah, we realize we have to raise revenues. but huh-uh but we're not going to raise tax cuts on the wealthiest of americans. we're going to mak
dick durbin says medicare and medicaid are fair game in deficit negotiations, but insist social security should be left alone. >> social security does not add one penny to our debt, not a penny. it's a separate funded operation, and we can do things, and i believe we should now, smaller things, played out over the long term that gives it solvency. medicare is another story. only 12 years of solvency lie ahead if we do nothing. so those who say don't touch it, don't change it are ignoring the obvious. >> despite showing willingness for reform -- >> can we talk about that for a second? >> i don't want to repeat what you said. >> it's bull hockey. >> that's not what you said. >> this whole thing has been a complete farce for years. there's no trust fund. they raided that a long time ago. but the bigger point, i will because you know what? my heart has grown like the grinch's since thanksgiving. i have so much to be thankful for. >> it's been growing ever since election day, basically. >> so i'm going to be kind. first of all, senator durbin deserves respect on this front because he
and economic impact and we're concerned about that. but when we're dealing with the debt and deficit, no matter what we do, in terms of raising taxes or cutting spending, it has a negative impact but we're running a 40% deficit year in and year out. we have to long term get that better aligned. >>> you're going to get the question, does congress know where the deal is going to come on fiscal cliff ultimately and this is all just posturing? you really don't? >> absolutely not. look, we've been dealing with this for a long time and for every dollar in tacks that you're willing to spend, how do you cure that appetite in an instance? we have hard work ahead of us, no question. >> the rebel group known as m-23 took over a major city. they have plans to move on the capital. it's part of a very bloody, bloody regional war. it's seen atrocity on both sides. it's cost millions of lives. you've been very vocal about it. what should the u.s. be doing here? >> this is the greatest humanitarian crisis that nobody has ever heard of. somewhere between 3 to 4 million people have been killed in the last few yea
and reduce the deficit? by creating jobs and growing our economy. not by cutting programs that families rely on most. we need senators udall to continue to stand up for us. >> jennifer: do you think that democrats are going to feel as pressured by the unions as republicans feel pressured by grover norquist? >> organized labor is the best organized, most effective strongest arm on the left in this country. they are a great ally for the democratic party and so, of course the democrats will feel pressure from labor. they are also going to feel pressure from -- >> jennifer: are they going to compromise? >> we'll find out. the democrats aren't one party in lock step. have conservative democrats liberal democrats. so the unions can't force every democrat to do something. and there's pressure also from the middle. you said pressure from the right. pressure from the left. but there's pressure from the middle. a democratic interest group that has some swaining called third way released polling that said hey,
clinton, the secretary of state, to get up there and by this time we have attention deficit disorder so i am worried this will fade away like other important issues that end up on the hills supposedly, under investigation. >>neil: but there are a number of folks who think if the administration were to push miss rice forward for secretary of state, it would be inviting acrimony but it would come at an enormous cost. do you grow? >>guest: i do, but what we are seeing is a weird school yard battle. the fact that senators john mccain and graham confronted the president and the president came out and publicly defended we ambassador rice, now you are getting in this weird shoving match where, perhaps, the president feels, as a matter of pride, he will put her forward. she is very smart person, very experienced individual, and the misstep on benghazi, on going out on the public and the sunday morning talk shows five days after the fact and claiming she narrative of the video and the spontaneous protests, she relied purely on the intelligence talking points defies belief so that part needs to be
house for another deficit meeting. instead, the president is hosting small business leaders, ceos, and heading to philadelphia to sell his position on taxes. a spokesman for the house speaker says the president should be focusing on congressional democrats who republicans they refuse to offer necessary spending cuts. other republicans said democrats are simply continuing election season. >> this seems like our friend on the other side are having difficulty turning off the campaign. we need to sit down and work this matter out. >> we are all here, this administration and those who have been elected to congress, to erve the iraqi people. to suggest that we should, now that the election is over, stop talking to them about these vital issues i think is bad advice. >> republicans also planted a little campaigning themselves. house republicans we will visit local small-business is to emphasize that threat to jobs posed by congressional democrats small business tax hike. gerri: thank you for that. we will watch out for those naked people on the hill. >> reporter: that's right. be carefu
revolution. we actually now have a path to energy independence in america, that's a $200 billion deficit right now. it's a bridge to renewable energy, renewable energy's going to take a long time. if we can move to gas, we'll get tremendous benefits in terms of cleaner energy on the way to renewable energy future. if we could get those things done, steve, this would be transformational for our economy. but we haven't been able to act on these things even though, as i said earlier, there's wide bipartisan consensus. >> thank you, michael. let me jump to doug and steve for a moment and just try to poke holes in this. if we roll back time to just before the financial crisis, you looked at the u.s. debt position, doug holtz-eakin was out there, you know, bitching about that already. [laughter] and john mccain and others had been. but it's much worse today. if you looked at debt in a different way, if you looked at private sector debt, if you looked at the fact -- forget government debt, but if you looked, government debt's gotten worse, but before the financial crisis, private sector debt wa
% of the taxpayers and it's maybe $5 billion to $10 billion a year. relative to a $1 trillion deficit -- not saying it's nothing, but it's just such a tiny amount -- >> people at his income level are paying that. >> i have to say, if we're going to have a big tax debate, let's have one that really matters, now about this warren buffett rule which won't raise enough revenue to make a dime's worth of difference whether it comes to the federal budget. let's figure out what do we want to use our tax code for and what do we have to change to make it do that. >> let's move on to the next one which would put you in -- give you a real tax problem here. the powerball jackpot set for a record $425 million this wednesday. no winner over the weekend. what would you do with a half billion that came as a windfall to you? >> first thing i'd do, i'd give everybody i know a lot of money and say don't come back again. here you go. i'm going to seed all your brilliant ideas but that's all you get. second, i think i would look for -- a lot like peter thiel has done, look for underinvested ideas, writers, artists, tech
billion a year and would pay ian volving credit but it doesn't touch our deficit or balance our budget and the other thing that is important they have to get something in return. we'll put it up on the clinton rates and not touch medicare or medicaid? it is all part of the deal. >> gretchen: once you get people back to the table. it is it like a marriage, marriages don't work when one party said i will not budge on anything. >> brian: i hope my wife is listening. >> steve: we are in the let's make a deal stage. both sides want to appear flexibility when it comes to doing something. we aapparently the president of the united states. the week after thanksgiving nothing is scheduled. but we understand that the top aides are working together to do something. who is leading the charge for the white house? tim geithner. it is interesting, in the beginning, during the confirmation it was revealed he did not file taxes properly and people say is he qualified to be the treasury of the secretary. according to the wall street journal. they work with him and like him. and jack lu who did it last t
, but the post says, quote, there are a lot of ways that deficit reduction cuts could reduce spending on obama kay. so -- obamacare. so is that where this is headed, what they describe as small tweaks acceptable to both sides? they wouldn't dismantle the law, but they would decrease it? >> i think there's a real chance that democrats will agree to scale back some of the subsidies to insurance on the exchanges. they're going to have to face a real tough choice; do you want to scale back spending on programs that people have been on for decades like social security and medicare, or do you want to scale back the projected spending on a program no one's gotten a check from yet? i think we'll see republicans and democrats agree to reduce the spending in the affordable care act, and there's real opportunity to. people who are going to be making $70,000, more than the median family income in the united states, are eligible for subsidies under the law. it's just too generous to be afforded. patti ann: there's an article in "forbes," very interesting, that says that these health exchanges as liberals h
talks about his plan to reduce the deficit by raising taxes on top earners today. this part should not be a tough sell for the president especially with the general public. abc "washington post" conducted a poll that reaffirms that 60% say let's do it. while it's mostly democrats and independents in favor, 40% of republicans agree to do it as well. that should give republicans some room to negotiate. tom call from oklahoma tells politco-that he thinks we should extend tax cuts and change the tax for top earners at a later date. taxes could go up but that does not constitute voting for a tax increase. a meeting with a big list from goldman sachs we're back after the break. as i looked out across the battlefield at antietam. i saw the future of one great nation. but only barely, because the sun was like, way in my grill. george mcclellan, the general, hands me his pair of foster grant sunglasses, and i could see! my wife, mary todd, found them so fetching. >> he looked so fine i started to call him babe-raham lincoln. >> i was like, mary, please. >> you look like a baby, a literal c
deficit with the goals set up plus the one. $6 trillion tax increase or five. particularly since the spending cuts have been agreed to buy none of the democrats. we do know obama included -- he said nice things about simpson- bowles. there are some spending restraints. not a single one of those ideas was put into obama's budget, not one. we know he is not for any of that. when republicans offered to put them into subsequent savings from the budget control act, the democrats all objected. they are officially against every saving -- every saving discussed in simpson-bowles. so, when they spent nine months discussing simpson-bowles, a $5 trillion tax increase and hint at tax reform and spending reform, and when they finally went into the room to see what they came up with, they did not have legislative language which it of taken two weeks and then -- done by staffers. a pilot typewritten -- pile of typewritten pages that the says "all work and no play makes jack a bellboy" if you watch the movie. nothing in nine months. it is not real. people say this imaginary agreement that is not
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 54 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)